Javascript is not enabled!

It appears that your web browser does not support JavaScript, or you have temporarily disabled scripting. Either way, this site won't work without it. Please take a look at how to enable javascript for more help.

Summary: The Council followed proper procedures in ensuring appropriate educational provision for a young person with significant behavioural difficulties. It handled the transition to post 16 provision correctly and responded properly to a safeguarding referral. Concerns about the young person's representative were explored in an appropriate way but were not clearly explained to the young person, his carer or the representative.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the refusal of an infant school place. This is because there is no suggestion of fault in the way the Council managed the admission arrangements or the panel considered the appeal.

Summary: The complainant alleges Kent County Council (the Council) should provide free school transport to her child to attend his local grammar school. I do not find fault in the way the Council reached its decision. I have therefore completed my investigation and I am closing the complaint.

Summary: There are not good reasons to exercise the Ombudsman's discretion to investigate the part of the complaint that could have been appealed to a tribunal. On the other part of the complaint, I do not see any fault in the Council's refusal to give Mrs B's daughter free school transport.

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs M's complaint about a school admission appeal panel refusing to grant her daughter a place in reception. It is unlikely she would say a lack of a school place at her preferred school has been directly caused by an appeal panel fault.

Summary: The School arranged a fresh appeal for Ms B in respect of her daughter, X, to remedy faults in a previous appeal found by the Ombudsman. The panel that heard the fresh appeal acted without fault.